click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
the most extreme element in their own party through the primary processes, and that's why harry reid right now is running the senate. >> but there are -- i mean, you saw the front page of the business section of "the new york times" yesterday. there are people who want these assault weapons, and they're selling off the shelves at twice the price. twice the price. i was online looking at guns. it's unbelievable how they're marketed. people like them. people in america feel they need these multiple -- what's that? >> did you buy one? >> no, i was just trying to understand. i personally don't get it. but there is -- it's not just an extreme fringe tiny bit of society. there are people out there who support this. >> i tell you what. >> in our society. >> there aren't enough of those people out there that feel like they have to have an assault weapon to carry presidential elections or senate elections. >> there's enough to make gun manufacturers a lot of money, to make the gun lobby powerful, to make people like wayne la bpie e pierre -- >> think about the money he makes by ginning up fear in a
targeted smart cuts. where does it fail? in the united states senate. harry reid can't lead a senate to doing fiscally responsible things. >> or anything. >> i'm not sure i understand what you were saying. if you're indicating that the republicans should go out and say they support the sequester, think you were saying the same thing. that's political suicide for them. even though it may be the right thing what happens is once the sequester takes effect if there are layoffs and people rebel against it, republicans are solely owning that. they are responsible for that. >> it's the president's idea. the white house came up with it. >> the republicans are saying they want the sequester. >> the president threatened to veto. they said we want to undo part of the sequester. the president said, i will veto that if you do. he's completely changed his tune. he's flip-flopping all over the place. this is his sequester. he came up with with it, signed it into law and republicans are saying, remember, this whole sequester is from the 2011 -- this is two-year-old spending cuts. we need to cut spen
to senate democratic leader harry reid who did not get a call from the president today and bush and to pass one of two house republican plans to stop the sequestered. cantor declaring house republicans have acted, and it is time for the president and senate democrats to join us. it is time to get off of the campaign trail and get to work, show us with spending reductions you prefer and let's find some common ground. in a tit-for-tat fight, carney brought out shots on the president's own plans to cut spending and tried to turn the blame game back on publicans. >> there will be jobs and if the sequester takes place. the president will, as he continues to do, call on republicans in congress to agree to avoid the sequestered because it is a wholly unnecessary will run the economy if it were to take place. >> except there were others in the president's party like former democratic national committee chairman howard dean suggesting the president should let the sequester happen to slice the pentagon's budget. telling the huffington post, i am in favor of the sequestered. it is tough on things
republicans passed so many things that just never see the light of day. and harry reid's senate. but the way things used to work, you used to pass things in the house, and then the senate would pass things. and then when harold and i at least were in washington in the '90s, then you go to conference committee, and they battle it out. that doesn't happen if harry reid doesn't pass things in the senate. he is the president's pocket veto. >> the step you're missing in that is -- and kevin mccarthy's interview proves that denial is not simply a river in egypt -- there's no conference committee. >> can i -- hold on. hold on. >> that's a good one. that was so fancy. >> is not just a river in egypt. >> that's what he does now. >> that's something brad pitt would say in one of those chanel ads. >> let's call brad. >> standing against the wall wearing nothing. >> he's wearing the sweater. >> go like this. >> you can't get away with saying things like that on this show. >> i want to hear his vision. >> why? more "morning joe." >> i know you're way above the cliche. i'm sorry. >> stupid cliche. >> what
stuart: we just had time to squeeze in the "highlight reel." >> president obama and harry reid wants more "revenue." >> and looking to expand it. >> republicans would have been blamed for any tax increase on the middle class. >> the end result being he takes more money off of wealthy people. >> it slows us down gradually. >> many can say texas don't matter. of course they will in the long run. stuart: here we come. what a perfect moment to throw it to dagen and connell. connell: good morning, everyone. dagen: america is a good bet. here to tell you why. connell: one of our guests in this hour could be the next energy secretary. dagen: more on the power outage and the record-breaking at cbs sports for that incredible game. connell: and cyber attacks, the white house considering action against china. dagen: i had the ravens, did you? by a field goal, 27-24. connell: nobody knows football like dagen mcdowell. clearly. dagen: stocks now has to do every 15 minutes, nicole petallides at the new york stock exchange. nicole: a good bet going. if yo you're betting on the mar, 14,000 mar
case to see if they can use the public pressure, west virginia and harry reid in nevada to do things they might not otherwise want to do. i'm extremely skeptical. people have tried this in the past. no doubt the obama folks have a better organization and social media gives you advantages you didn't have in the past but they're trying to do something i have not seen signs they are willing to do in a non-presidential election. >> i do think, michael steele, the republicans will see the president talk on guns tonight and see the victims of newtown. i think that's going to cut through. we've all had these moments and said the union addresses ab had these moments and maybe there won't be an assault weapon ban and maybe won't go after thes a 99 high capacity magazines. but republicans will have a hard time saying no to background checks and saying no to gun trafficking laws. if they do say no to these items that are 9010s, we used to go around the hill saying it's 8020, 80-20 negative. if it's 80-20, that train's coming an you get out of the way. this is 90-10. my question is will republic
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)